On Saturday evening Russia’s Sergey Lazarev won the hearts and minds of Eurovision voters across the continent, topping the televote with 361 points, just ahead of televote runner-up Ukraine (323 points) and well ahead of third-place televote finisher Poland (222 points). But, as with Italy’s Il Volo last year, the professional juries marked Russia down, ranking him only fifth (behind Australia, Ukriane, France and Malta) and costing him the title.

Today his composer Filip Kirkorov spoke out, decrying the fact that Sergey received zero points from 21 juries. Yes, that’s HALF of them. Clearly offended, he went on to suggest that the jury’s share of the overall vote should be reduced from 50% to 25%.

A photo posted by ?????? ???????? (@fkirkorov) on May 15, 2016 at 7:29am PDT

Kirkorov, an influential figure in Russia’s Eurovision scene, even suggested that a change is necessary if Russia is to stay in the contest.

As the composer and producer of Russian entry I fully respect the result. I knew the rules and I accepted them. As a fan of this contest I am sad that a song, an entry and an artist like Sergey Lazarev was given zero points from 21 juries! When at the same time, the audience all over Europe voted for him with 3 points and above. 29 countries gave him 8, 10 and 12 points!! I really believe that EBU should reconsider the way juries are voting. Maybe take them down to 25%? Something needs to be done for Russia to take part again. This is my opinion.

This follows comments from the Russian broadcaster Channel One, which make it clear they are not amused by the jury’s sway over the results.

In a report published last night, the broadcaster points out that the Ukrainian jury did not award Russia any points, while the Ukrainian public awarded Russia top marks.

Yuri Akutsya, the head of Music Broadcasting at Russia’s Channel One, said:

For me, the most important thing is the results of the audience voting. Because music is as a whole composed of the audience. A professional jury is for some other form of music scores. Viewers and listeners appreciate the song, so I think that is a victory for Lazarev! Lazarev won.

Sergey is staying positive and diplomatic.

In an Instagram post he published on Sunday, he thanked televoters for crowning him their favourite, but also gave a congratulatory shout out to Jamala.

213 Comments

Bart StaelensMay 23, 2016 @ 2:44 am

If it was only televoting Poland would have been 3th place and Australia 4th place. Poland before Australia???? That’s ridiculous. There’s diaspora that has an influence on televoting. Other exemples of how absurd the televoting was: Israel only 11 points (it’s outside Europe, it has no neighbours), Malta only 16 points (it’s an Island, so it has no neighbours), Australia couldn’t win the televoting because it’s outside Europe. The juries are political, but the televoters are even MORE political.

AlexMay 19, 2016 @ 8:20 am

@Mushroom: In theory I am not against the doubling of the jury sizes. But I don’t think it’s necessary. Plus, you’re making it twice as hard for a jury to be chosen and kept – remember, their hotel stays need to be paid for (and wouldn’t the jury members need to be compensated for their time as well?). I don’t agree that the EBU should choose them – how should the EBU be expected to find qualified people in all these countries who have no conflicts of interest with any of the entrants? That should be the responsibility of the broadcaster, whose staff is way more familiar with the qualified folks inside their country.

And the fact that you don’t trust a jury because their ranking is way different from the norm doesn’t mean that the jury ranking is not legitimate or trustworthy. There’s such a thing as statistical outliers and diversity of tastes. That’s the whole point of averaging or adding different votes – to represent the various opinions that are held by music experts and public voters in different countries.

blondboybcMay 18, 2016 @ 6:07 am

Though I can understand Russia’s disappointment with the lack of any score from 21 countries, Ukraine also failed to gain any points with 17 juries, much to my surprise! Clearly Australia cleaned house with the juries, save 3: San Marino, Ireland (!) and Czechia. Nonetheless, in the televote, Russia managed points with EVERY single country, as did Ukraine–with the exception of Iceland. Conclusion: Australia was the clear jury fav; Russia and Ukraine the televote fav. The end.

ankaMay 18, 2016 @ 4:13 am

Russia has gained and will enjoy a triple victory at this year’s Eurovision and probably well into the next year for these three reasons:
1) Russia was a true uncontested winner way before the Eurovision started, Sergey enjoyed the status of the major favorite for nearly 3 months. He obviously won with the true and honest vote of Europe
2) In the process of voting Russia has discovered that what the mainstream mass media has completely failed at demonizing Russia
3) Because the voting at this song contest was so coarsely forged by the EBU, the thinking people of Europe became extremely doubtful regarding the honesty of anything that comes from their elites in general. Because if some supposedly apolitical song contest has so much controversy, how can one trust the political functions intended for more serious reason. Zero trust.
So seems to me that it was a fantastic victory for Russia after all.

Dicke FixMay 17, 2016 @ 11:58 pm

I agree with Filip Kirkorovs call for a reduced weight for the jury votes. The question is why they are needed at all since the jury-system is susceptible to both bribery and political pressure.

The polish song was ranked 3 by the combined public vote. It was ranked 25th by the combined jury vote

Some other very striking examples of the undemocratic “cultural and political correct” jurys:

Despite the chilly relations between their goverments, the russian people voted the ukrainan song on second place, their jury put it on 24th place! The Ukraine people voted the Russian song on first position, their jury put Russia on 22nd place!

In 2015 the Lithuanian people had russian song on third place, their jury on 20th place.

In 2014 the people of Armenia, Azerbaijan och Belarussia had all winning Austrias Conchita Wurst among the four first positions whereas the jurys put on place 24-26.

The same year Irish and British people put the Polish song “We are slavic” on 1st position wheras their jurys had it on place 26 and 25.

When it comes to music, it is obvious that the “best” song should BY DEFINITION be the one that the majority enjoys the most, not the one that the politicians or the jurys find the most appropriate.

ESCaddictMay 17, 2016 @ 11:33 am

@1944
That parody is disgusting & insulting, not only to Sergey but gays. Shame on you.

Oh…….. my last post was a response to one of your comments and I agree we need the jury to be more “cohesive” and less random. Less tactical and biased ranking should be eliminated by appointing true music professionals.

The criteria set for the juries by the EBU are just guidelines and we clearly saw from the Russian jury video the voting form just has only one line for narrative per song. I’ve not seen any evidence that there is any % attached to the criteria, let alone changing them?? I have always assumed they carry the same weight, who knows.

You said “Sweden sent in a song with very little staging.” I assure you it was not “sent” by desire. Bjorkman said he had a song capable of winning ESC in each semi. You can usually tell his favourites by the staging and the singing position. Clearly in the last semi Molly Sandén was his preferred choice. The public chose Frans, Bjorkman had to go with it.

ZebbMay 17, 2016 @ 9:17 am

@Alexanderized I’d correct you. “Russian government has recognized that issue in 1944 as such and even apologized for it.” For first, Crimean Republic still not restored like it was created in early USSR (as national), which means that crimean tatars is still out of caretake of their native lands. For second, only for last half-year we here in Crimea saw probably most numerous detentions and trials for nothing against tatars because of new bans of social and philosophic organizations. So the background is even raising more now, which never was since they started to return over past 25 years. Beware of ‘facts’.

MillieMay 17, 2016 @ 5:13 am

At the end of the day, the song that inspires people to pick up their phone and vote or download it to their phone may not be ‘technically the best’ song. And that’s OK. Eurovision is about the whole package and people liked and voted for Sergey’s overall performance. Losing because a few record company execs or whatever didn’t like it is really is unfair to him.

And don’t get me started on how poor Sergey, who was the sweetest and most darling thing when I was lucky enough to meet him, was basically used for the producers LOLOL EVIL RUSSIA DEFEATED BY GOOD UKRAINE angle at the end,

ErnMay 16, 2016 @ 7:46 pm

Ukraine and Australia were better! That bit is undisputed.

However, the Russian entry should have been in everyone’s top 10. The fact that so many juries overlooked it is ludicrous. This was deliberately done, and it shows a bias with the jury system.

That being said, this is how Eurovision works. It’s all part of the game.

Jatvarður GunlaugssonMay 16, 2016 @ 6:31 pm

Or you could send a less bad song.
By the way, we always used to laugh at this guy because he genuinely looks like something out of the Hunger Games. With more plastic surgery.

NebiMay 16, 2016 @ 5:42 pm

The Russian number was one of the most spectacular since I’ve been watching Eurovision. It didn’t need to win with the Jury but 0 points from 21 juries? That means that it didn’t even come in the top ten for 21 juries? I find that very hard to believe.

musicfanMay 16, 2016 @ 2:28 pm

Pure emotion succeed – congratulation Jamala.
Sergej, the staging, his performance was on a very high technical level BUT because of that fact there was too less emotion in his song and performance and thats the reason why he didn’t win. From the very beginning on Russia wanted to win, they felt sure to win . Its not wrong to want to succeed but it´s not good to be too self-assured of smthg. Sometimes is less more.

AlexanderizedMay 16, 2016 @ 11:57 am

@Racal
“the real problem is Russia lost to a Crimean Tatar singing about Russian crimes. That’s what they will never swallow.”

You seem like a very profound expert on those matters. Over the past few year, Russians have learned to ignore this childish behavior when some of the people from ex-Soviet countries are trying to put the blame of the Soviet government on the current Russians. And if you must know: Russian government has recognized that issue in 1944 as such and even apologized for it.

But as we’ve all seen it works out just fine bringing the political issues into the song contest to score. And that what makes me sad the most: a hell of a lot people are totally fine with politics involved at the ESC. It’d be a problem with other countries, but with Russia – why not?

And again, you’re missing the point: it’s not about Russia in this article, but about the unfair voting system that can be corrupted if need be. I’ve been watching ESC since 2000 and I’ve never watched such a negative reaction after the final – and it’s still going.

Mark BMay 16, 2016 @ 11:54 am

“You Are The Only One”
Musically – very dated. It felt like something Greece would have submitted a decade ago.
Lyrically – “Thunder and lightning, it’s getting exciting” was cringe-worthy and irritating. English that seems reasonable to non-English speaking people, but lame to those of us who do.
Visually – this year, any interaction with visual effects were going to be compared with “Heroes”. Russia’s song felt like an expensive imitation that totally missed “Heroes” key ingredient – simplicity. When I first saw the video clip, I KNEW this would win ON THE CONDITION THAT Russia could reproduce the video on stage. The first warning sign that this wouldn’t be possible was when Stockholm’s stage was revealed. With its angles and central corridor, anyone hoping for a clean LED backdrop would have been disappointed. Most of the stunts from Russia’s video (such as flying rocks, collapsing walls and underwater effects) require a giant canvas. New stunts had to be found, and they were nowhere near as good. Conchita’s wings were beautiful, fiery & dramatic. Sergey’s lacked subtlety and were washed out by his spotlight, spoiling the effect. When he missed his queues (even slightly), his face would be in shadow while the screen behind would be washed out. Petty, I know, but intense scrutiny comes with over-hyped songs.
By performing in front of a large box in the middle of the stage, Sergey did not utilise the stage at all. Yes, the steps up the box were impressive, but when he reached the top of the box and leaned on its side, how crap did that look? And when he climbed over the lip, was that meant to be blood? WTF was that? Dare I add that when the orange glowing light reduced into a small ball, I thought I was watching a Nurofen advertisement.
This song was full of confusing and poorly executed imagery set to a song from a decade ago.
Kirkorov is further spoiling Russia’s image by being a sore loser. I’m Australian, so I understand the feeling of missing out. The difference is that we didn’t enter the competition with a superiority complex to make us look like fools after missing the win.
Nobody should enter this contest with a sense of entitlement.

kblomkvistMay 16, 2016 @ 11:27 am

Such a drastic difference between the televoters and the juries looks like a conspiracy to not let Russian guy win who was the public’s absolute favorite. I see so much hatred toward anything Russian (russophobia) in this forum, and in general, that it makes me scared that people’s preconceived hatred is overshadowed by an objective opinion. Ukraine of course had every possible ingredient to have the juries let her win: a political message (i thought those weren’t allowed, but since it was Ukraine vs. Russia, that was fine), a catchy tune, a good looking crying woman (who came out of a war-torn country) – why WOULDN’T she win? LOL OK, I personally also liked the melody and the beat of the song (not the lyrics), but the matter of the fact remains that she’d get high scores even if she farted on the stage. Well, OK – we’ll see what happens next year…. one thing is safe to say, Russia probably won’t win anyway 😀

DSMay 16, 2016 @ 11:17 am

Funny how international competition tries to stay away from politics. This whole situation reminds me of 1936 Olympic Games and considering that noone wants this to repeat thus don’t want to go to Moscow for next Eurovision. Meanwhile Russia will spend whatever needed to win so it can justify current regime.

To be totally honest with the audience organizers should expell countries involved in military conflicts from the competition. That includes Russia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Armenia as of today situation. If two countries are in a state of war you will se war on eurovision as well. Lets do Hunger Games for those instead, it will be more entertaining.

Aly MarvelMay 16, 2016 @ 11:16 am

Such voting system ruins the real choise of ESC fans. Just look at Poland! From last place in jury voting to 8th because he was third by televoting, third among 26 performances!!! How that’s possible?! Is it possible that Malta’s jury gave 12 points to UK fairly? Let’s be honest – they don’t deserve it.
I think this time it was great poitical show “Ukraine vs Russia” and I hate it so much. My trust to voting results decreases every next year. May be Jamala deserves to win but not this way. By the way I’m not sure that her song could participate in ESC.
So, that was great show but extremely dirty finish. Unfortunately. Best wishes)

BasterClasterMay 16, 2016 @ 10:40 am

@CookyMonzta – Russia has given to Ukraine 10 points!!! Tele-voting! Do not lie to us in the eye!!!

CookyMonztaMay 16, 2016 @ 9:51 am

@vlvikin: JL said the same thing in the very first post, prompting my response.

MushroomMay 16, 2016 @ 9:17 am

@vlvikin 4 million ethnic Ukrainians as well as 500,000 Ukrainian refugees and 2 million gastarbeiters live in Russia.

vlvikinMay 16, 2016 @ 8:49 am

@CookyMonzta

The Russia public gave Ukraine 10, while their jury left them blank.

ESCArgyMay 16, 2016 @ 8:36 am

@Oxana

I love Kirkorov’s face, ha ha ha! Seriously, I can’t stop watching the results video on YouTube! It’s so funny! Kirkorov and some others act like babies. I still remember when I was a little kid that we played games and when someone lost, they said that it was unfair and they wanted the rules to change. Kirkorov is doing exactly the same, I can’t believe he is so immature!

MushroomMay 16, 2016 @ 8:20 am

@Alex After learning the information about the Danish jury I realized just how crucial is the voting of every jury member. Just imagine that there may be another one who was mistaken and there can be another one (or dozens) who have been paid to vote in a specific way. So who is the real winner if no fraud. No one can be sure. The jury should stay, however their number should be increased (at least to 10), they shouldn’t be chosen by the broadcasters, but by the EBU. There can be applied a trust ranking for jury members. For example I don’t trust the Lithuanian jury because they rank Russia 24th in 2016 when Russia comes 3rd in the end and they ranked Russia 20th when it came 2nd, moreover they give high ranks to the outsiders and so on.

an esc fanMay 16, 2016 @ 8:11 am

Last year Israel’s Golden Boy did better in the televote.
Maybe this year Hovi was not good enough.

CookyMonztaMay 16, 2016 @ 7:52 am

@SD: Just saw your post. Indeed. Israel and the Czech Republic would have been sent packing after the semis, and the Aussies would have finished 4th overall.

CookyMonztaMay 16, 2016 @ 7:39 am

@JL: The Ukrainian public gave Russia 12, while their jury left them blank.

@Patrick: Interesting point. Not to mention that 18 juries also left Ukraine blank. The jury system must be retained, but I also think it would be a good idea to have 10 on the jury.

And let us consider this: If there was no jury, Israel would be the biggest loser, because Hovi would have been sent packing in the semifinal by the public. 🙁 Even Gabriela and the Czechs would have failed to make it to Saturday.

an esc fanMay 16, 2016 @ 7:06 am

Last year, Polina Gagarina accepted her defeat because she knew she did not
win the televote, Italy did (without any diaspora or bloc, so you see what
happens when you have a good performance – good for Italy), but this year
it is hard to accept that you are defeated by jury who just hate you because
your staging was too good and too expensive.

KrinosMay 16, 2016 @ 7:00 am

I always will consider the televote’s winner to be the true winner. Jamala won with these rules, but Sergey won the hearts of thousands and deserves the title. I don’t know if it would have saved him, but I think the juries should award 8 points max.

AlexMay 16, 2016 @ 6:57 am

I totally disagree with Kirkorov. @Racal and @Charles make good points here. First, nobody ever will make the suggestion of 75% jury, and Kirkorov should at least point out why juries are inherently less meritorious than public vote if he’s going to make this suggestion. Second, why should the jury be obliged to vote for the song that the televoters like, or vice versa? The intent of the jury-televote system that was introduced in 2009 is that you should have to please both a methodical, discerning jury and a popular audience to win a contest. And that’s what Ukraine did. So what if they didn’t win either vote? That can happen, and it’s alright because the point is to get an entry that is stellar from both of these points of view.

Also, @Graph – massive respect for your opinion on this, that even though you liked Russia more than Ukraine you were fine with Ukraine winning and could see the merit in it not being Russia to win 🙂

an esc fanMay 16, 2016 @ 6:50 am

Instead of reconciliation, now ESC will bring new ”historical” entries
and I’m sorry for Russia, it was punished because it’s staging was
too good. ESC should become an radio contest then, if only music
should matter.

JulianMay 16, 2016 @ 6:45 am

Jury rules to make them less biased:
– 10 people instead of 5
– National broadcasters make a list of at least 300 professionals from their country. The morning jury needs to mark the songs 10 are randomly drawn from that list by the national EBU designed superviser who sends them the rules and the documents they need to fill in and bring them signed. The evening they come in a room with 10 computers with headphones for each and independently mark the songs they think are best. After that the national broadcaster can throw a small party where members of the jury can talk about the songs and whatever else.
– since there is no combined vote there shouldn’t be anymore the kill the diaspora or neighbor requirement

BasterClasterMay 16, 2016 @ 5:52 am

I’ve been wondering! The Ukrainians themselves are not ashamed of such a victory? After all, there’s no need to be smart to see clean politics! Political song wins the song contest, which positions itself as not a political contest! Under strange circumstances, very strange voting!!!

If my country got this win – I would be ashamed!

Dan in OzMay 16, 2016 @ 5:34 am

Well, beating 42 other coutries to win in Eurovision is a huge effort, as there are so many factors that could spell the end of your hopes.

And so, why not have a jury vote winner and a public vote winner – i.e. 2 winners?

There are good arguements for the juries – more measured and expert decision-making on the musical merits of the songs (Russia’s really wasn’t a great tune. Catchy, but lyrically dull, but deserved a public vote win because as a performance it was amazing).

And good arguments for the televote (tele-anything is so old hat!). People should have a voice in choosing their favourite, but I do think that political/diaspora effects are stronger in the televote than the jury vote.

That way, we can have 2 winners. In a final, as Mons stated, all countries that make it are winners, as they’ve made it through their country’s selection process and the semi-finals.

That may reduce the issues we’re having now.

LolillyMay 16, 2016 @ 4:59 am

Jury voting sucks big time! They were more political than ever. This really needs to change.

LolillyMay 16, 2016 @ 4:59 am

Jury woting sucks big time! They were more political than ever. This really needs to change.

KiloMay 16, 2016 @ 4:51 am

I am sorry that it is not defeated Australia. I think low to push the two countries – Russia and Ukraine once again on the political basis. Their performances have been good but it is not the winners for me (((

JonasMay 16, 2016 @ 3:20 am

50 to 100 members on each jury?

Um, no. Ten to twelve would be better.

JumperMay 16, 2016 @ 2:40 am

I’m happy with the Jury result.

Juries should stay but with more people (50 to 100 is good) and more professional and independent.

The biased result from televote should to be mended to avoid neighbourhood blocking countries.

Eurovision should progerss their result in order to raise global awareness for their singers/contestant.

euranaMay 16, 2016 @ 2:34 am

Help us to revise the results of this contest. Please sign and share. Your voice is important. Every voice is important. We need at least 1500 more voices

What’s changed with regards to Russia from 2015 to 2016 and is it politically motivated or a no-confidence vote in a megalomaniac scenography turning Sergey into a superhero from a video game console?

Back in 2015 when ‘Lady Gagarina’ came in second, the only 2 countries not awarding it points were Lithuania and San Marino. That raised a few eyebrows back then, especially where Lithuania was concerned, but the vote was a valid one and it wouldn’t have changed anything in Russia’s final ranking. Here we are in 2016: Lithuania’s jury and 20 other national juries all of a sudden have a beef with the Russian entry and guess what: San Marino isn’t one of those 20 juries…how is that possible?

One can’t rule out that some juries injected politics into this, but it’s entirely plausible that they rejected it mainly because it screamed of the idolatry of technology, when an impressionable audience is gaping with its eyes wide open in awe of a visual illusion that sets a dangerous precedent for what is still a ‘song contest’ and not a state sponsored digital fair at ‘Expo 2016’…the source for all Eurovision inequality stems from the ever-increasing emphasis on glitter, pyrotechnics and special effects: If this was the juries’ way of curbing that tendency this year, all the power to them…

Consider this alternative scenario: 31 juries vote for Russia out of a total of 41 juries, but the average vote is only 4.2 points leaving Russia with a total of 130 points. Would Philip Kirkorov have made a similar claim then? After all, the juries didn’t favor Ukraine either: It’s average score per country is only 5.1 which wouldn’t have been enough to secure a first place under the ranking vote system applied between 2013-2015.

It seems to me that many juries didn’t want to see a repeat of last year’s winning concept, where Mans interacts with an animated figure, lights and baloons. By the same token, one should ask if Cyprus, Greece, Belarus and Azerbaijan’s juries gave Russia 12 points simply out of an empirical assessment or did Cyprus and Greece play ‘The Greek Card’ with their respective countrymen being part of the Russian entry’s team while Belarus and Azerbaijan simply displayed their absolute loyalty to Russia as they’ve been doing ever since??

There is certainly room for re-evaluating the current juries’ 5 member format because we have seen first hand how a female member of the RUSSIAN jury abused her jury role with an unethical conduct during a live Periscope streaming of the voting procedure. One can’t rule out that the national juries of other countries were made aware of this incident and that it had a more profound effect than previously estimated.

We shouldn’t be bothered if Russia and Belarus choose to skip next year just as much as Ukraine’s ‘Black Lists’ are part of a psychological warfare which will definitely become more verbally aggressive until the next EBU reference group meeting: Let the parties blow off some steam and enjoy this window of finger pointing and mutual loathing while they can…

JonasMay 16, 2016 @ 2:31 am

Funny how Philip Kirkirov is also the man who happened to write arguably the best song Ukraine ever entered (2008’s Shady Lady) and was beaten by Russia that time! Poor guy can’t catch a break.

Statistic's manMay 16, 2016 @ 1:30 am

One thing is sure, 5 members is really not enough. OK for a jury, but at least 15 members.
That’s crazy when you think of the danish jury mistake.
Thanks to an error of ONE person, a country (Ukraine) went from 0 point to 12 points.
Just one person can put a country from 0 to 12 points, it’s insane.

Can you imagine the power you have when only one vote of one person can totally change a country vote to the complete opposite !

PatrickMay 16, 2016 @ 1:17 am

C’mon Russia.

This also means that the song was visually appealing, but there was no substance and ‘intrigue’ for the jury to give votes.

Dan82May 16, 2016 @ 12:47 am

Here’s my take on it: I don’t really care about all the varying opinions about jury voting versus audience voting and which is the most good or evil. Those issues and the politics that inevitably come with it have been part of the song contest for as long as I have been watching the event. You’ll never be able to get rid of it and if you can’t live with it, you clearly have been watching the wrong show all this time! Even if you were to take away jury voting entirely, then broadcasters would just spend the time leading up to the song contest to voice their (politically correct) opinion on national TV and influence their viewing public to go one way or the other.

One thing I was really disturbed about with this new voting system is the pointlessness of it all. The second part of the broadcast is not a results show any more, on Saturday they wasted almost one hour with pointless stuff. What’s the reason to spend so much time receiving the jury votes (over 32 minutes for 42 national broadcasters to get their words in), when they then rush through the combined viewership votes (less than 19 minutes including the inevitable delays to build tension toward the end) that are going to mix everything up again anyway? In one moment you can go from hero to zero or the other way around, because differences between a country’s public and jury voting results are to be expected. In the end I didn’t have a clue what went into these hundreds of points from the phone and online voting, because we only ever saw the total point sums made up from all 42 countries.

Even worse than that however, is the lengths they’ve gone to in order to delay announcing a winner for as long as possible. Yes I agree, that superior artists leading by a huge margin don’t make for an exciting finish to the evening. That has happened in the past, but this year’s system is too much of an artificial change for my tastes.

By going down that road, the organisers have put a critical piece of information out there into the broad public that should have never been shown so blatantly, even if it is the factual truth. This year’s winner, Ukraine, was neither on top of the jury ranking nor did it win the popular vote. I now know that Russia was the “winner of the people” and that the jurors wanted Australia to win by a considerable margin. What does that mean for Ukraine then? It’s hard for me to call the country a deserved winner, when I know two groups of voters that chose someone else instead.

mangouMay 16, 2016 @ 12:46 am

He’s just mad they lost, that’s all. If the system had benefited Russia they would be touting it’s success right about now.

taniaMay 16, 2016 @ 12:41 am

oh, uk jury vote is the one i respect. i think georgia was very cute. and 10 points to ukraine is also good.
what i can’t understand is why so many people with kirkorov on the head demand jury points to russia. they even created the petition. nobody is obliged to give them points. all in all the song was not very good. and it seems to me that mishmash of visual effects was intended mostly for surprising and attraction of non-professionals what it did in the end

BasterClasterMay 16, 2016 @ 12:39 am

If you look at the vote OGAEhttp://esctracker.com/ogae
You will be absolutely clear that the song of Ukraine was not the best. It was a completely political vote. Has nothing to do with the real musical competition.

All the evidence suggests that Ukraine would have lost. If the competition was fair.

The most deserving winners: France, Australia, Armenia, Russia.

PollaskiMay 16, 2016 @ 12:22 am

@Maclaren

Didn’t surprise me in the least that the UK gave Georgia 12-points. Midnight Gold was a very british indie-rock sounding song. If anyone was going to like it, its the Brits.

@Maclaren
“Many of them looked like random numbers generators as opposed to music professionals.”
Absolutely true. The thing is that the jurors need a marking scheme which is very prescriptive if they are to look like a cohesive group. Just when I thought the EBU had got the whole thing in a much better shape (easier to spot jury vote fixing), they take a backward step. 2016 is very like 2014 in terms of jury cohesiveness. 2015 was very different – the jurors from all countries acted much more as a group.

Ivan BrowdyMay 16, 2016 @ 12:12 am

Jamala deserves 1st place. So strong vocalist and person. Love her

EllieMay 16, 2016 @ 12:10 am

Sadly to admit but Filip Kirkorov is completely right. I know for sure that my country’s jury gave 0 points to Russia two years in a row. It will happen again next year and a year after. It has nothing to do with the song. If Måns was Russian, do you think that he would have won the Eurovision?

Our jury even admitted it to the local media that they did it on purpose last year and they were very proud of it.

Even if one jury member wanted to give points to Russia, imagine what pressure he or she would be under when the rest refuses to give points? When the music scene is so small and everyone knows everyone, I doubt that anyone would take that chance.

It is very sad because it is completely against what ESC stands for. But I do not see any change in a near future.

taniaMay 16, 2016 @ 12:10 am

@Lilichuu
“I’m frankly shocked Jamala had such a high score from the general public, a bit surprised by her Jury score not being higher though.”
—-exactly the same about me

@ Oxana
that’s really funny about the petition ))
and they were even not 2nd, but 3rd

C’mon Russia! We can make a special voting for you so that you win every year. What we need is 100% jury vote, but not corrupted like now. It must be done like in the Oscars: clear items to value, and supervised voting juror by juror. Bye bye diaspora and neighbouring voting.

Mitko NikolovMay 16, 2016 @ 12:00 am

I personaly dislike the Russian song and did hope it would not win, but not like that. Heroes was not my winner last year either. Obviously there should be some change… the disparity between jury and televote is mind baffling.

MaclarenMay 15, 2016 @ 11:57 pm

I would say that overall jurers quality was questionable. The UK jury gave 12 points to… Georgia. This raised eyebrows even with Graham Norton from BBC who said sarcastically: who did you say our jurers are? Many of them looked like random numbers generators as opposed to music professionals.

RacalMay 15, 2016 @ 11:54 pm

@Alexanderized: Everybody is talking about how the juries supposedly robbed Russia of their victory, and yet nobody mentions how the televoters robbed Australia of theirs? So next year “my country” could just as well be robbed by the televoters. (And TBH, if next year my country sends a guy who climbs a thunder iceberg with black wings, I’ll probably die of embarrassment before I see the results).

There’s no ideal voting system, they all have their shortcomings. I think a 100% jury system would be the best (or the least bad), but the current 50/50 system seems like a good compromise to me.

Australia was “robbed” just as Russia, just as Il Volo was robbed last year. And yet Australia and Italy are not making such a fuss. Why? Because the real problem is Russia lost to a Crimean Tatar singing about Russian crimes. That’s what they will never swallow. They don’t care about the voting system (they benefited from it like crazy over the years).

ZephyrMay 15, 2016 @ 11:54 pm

What should be reformed is the televote. There are too many ethnic Russians outside Russia (and Poles outside Poland).

Judges are there to control crazy televoting. A third place is a well-deserved placement. They’re just bitter they placed third with the song they thought was a masterpiece, but only has a beautiful visual value and decent music value.

Phillip’s 1995’s entry is absolutely horrendous so to his favor, we can say he has improved.

Notice the Televote’s about 50/50 between block and non-block 12-points, while non-blocks in the jury voting outnumber blocks at nearly 3-1. And that’s not even throwing in diasporas or various other factors.

MayaMay 15, 2016 @ 11:47 pm

There was fishy jury voting everywhere, not just for Russia.
But set everything aside, Sergey seems like such a sweetheart and I truly hope his career gets even bigger after this.

@Eugene – yes we have been here before
The EBU are masters of giving the public just enough information to persuade us that they are being open, when in fact they are not being open at all.
The voting page on the Eurovision web-site gives a list of section titles, but each juror is not just coming up with say a mark out of 10 for each category – not just off the top of their heads – it is much more complex than that. The EBU do not say what percentage of the jury marks are allocated to each section for instance. Last year, there seems to have been a reasonably big percentage of the jury marks for the staging. This year, this is apparently not the case, because Sweden sent in a song with very little staging. If Sweden thought it was important last year and won, then they are not going to decide not to bother with the staging this year! Russia obviously believed that staging was important this year……
Changing the jury marking scheme means changing the emphasis – how you allocate the marks across the sections. If you change the emphasis, you will get a vastly different result if you allocate a greater percentage of the marks to a subjective category, as opposed to an objective one (one where there is much more of a definite answer). So to illustrate perhaps last year we had 35% of the marks for the staging, 15% for the vocals etc. with the other categories having 50% between them totaling up to 100%. Again to illustrate, this year let’s have 50% (say) for composition and originality, and 5% for the vocals etc. Who knows exactly how they have distributed the marks across those sections, but we are very sure that they have changed it.
Why are we sure? We are sure because last year there was a high level of correlation (agreement) between jurors (we used statistical methods to ascertain that there had been a change in the level of correlation between 2014 and 2015). That increase in correlation led to the top 7 songs being well separated from the field in terms of the percentage of the marks taken by them. There are graphs of this – follow the link to see them.

PollaskiMay 15, 2016 @ 11:42 pm

So here’s an interesting study:

Jurie’s 12 points, divided into Block and non-block. Basically, for block, I’m going with either sharing a border, or part of a well-defined demographic (Balkans, Former USSR, Scandinavia, etc)

Come on, people, Russia was all about tricks, the video wall and other trite stuff. Third place is too high for that generic 2000 crap.

Here are lyrics for the parody of his Eurosong performance. Play the video on YouTube and follow this text. Enjoy. 🙂

Verse 1
I will close my eyes cause I feel shame
Hypocrites like me are a dozen a dime
In my dear Russia all gay guys are vilified
But I have to tell you now
My secret now

Bridge
Won’t ever come out
Cause Russians would kill me dead
Nothing or noone would save my poor ass
I love it from behind but do „the train“, too
So I’ll just try…

Chorus
Lying to voters of Eurosong contest
Blind them with strobe lights and video walls
Who cares ’bout music when fire is burning
Adore my CGI, gays look at my balls
I’m a macho guy
Can’t you see my moves?
Learnt from the book on how to be straight
So incredible, so unbelievable
That some people still think I’m not gay

I saw some cool stuff on a Thailand TV show
I thought to myself: why not just copy it all?
Noone will notice cause Thailand is far away
Holly crap, now comes the hardest part…

Don’t mind my voice because climbing is very hard
I’m doing my best trying not to fall down
Already fell and my ass is still red
Or is that from last night?

Teenage boys and girls
Just please vote for me
If I don’t win, I can’t go back home
All the shiny crap
Makes you think I sing well
Though already I lost my whole breath

You’re my only guy…

Must win this contest, so tha’ts why I’m trying
Trying too hard, I got lost in the crap
Out of breath by now
Muscles ache like hell
There is no art here
Just my poor act
My integrity out of the window now
The girl in the end makes it all fine

MTDMay 15, 2016 @ 11:33 pm

In the end, congrats SVT for the great show.

And thanks EBU for the overall political drama that instead being ended on Saturday night, it went fast forward with a BANG! Too bad. But, it’s your thing, so you can’t do anything more now. Your PR handling of the whole this mess of an ESC this year is AT THE LOWEST BAR POSSIBLE.

And it keeps getting worse.

Well, at least I have Linda Woodruf, excellent hosting from Mans and Petra and great TV show. Sigh.

LilichuuMay 15, 2016 @ 11:28 pm

It wouldn’t be the Sunday after Eurovision without some Russian salt. Here is how I see it. Russia appealed more to the masses, it’s catchy and not difficult to get. It appeals to the lowest common denominator. It’s not a bad thing there is always a place in the world for catchy pop songs. Ukraine’s song is more difficult. It is a song that is harder to understand and grasp and there is so much going on with it composition wise that if you’re someone who studied music and knows that side of things there are more things to grab a hold of as far as Ukraine is concerned.

I’m frankly shocked Jamala had such a high score from the general public, a bit surprised by her Jury score not being higher though. As far as Sergey goes that Jury score seems about what I thought it would be and the televote score is high as I would have expected.

Based on the restated result, it should be allowed to consider a further deduction for the fake Sammarinese televoting:

The final degree of separation would only be 2 points!

Ukraine 510
Australia 508

AlexanderizedMay 15, 2016 @ 11:21 pm

You people—either out of stupidity or out of spite—are trying to make it all about Russia. You’re deliberately missing the point of the article. It’s not about Russia or Ukraine, but the unfair jury voting that can completely change the winner if need be. Last year it happened to Italy, this year—to Australia and Russia, and next year it might be your country ’cause a performer from another land will sing a “personal” song about holocaust or something.

ÖsterrikeMay 15, 2016 @ 11:20 pm

The Danish jury votes were incorrectly compiled and had to be restated according to ESCunited:

Ukraine’s and Australia’s degree of separation now is merely 9 points.

RacalMay 15, 2016 @ 11:14 pm

Russia received a MASSIVE amount of points from geopolitics voting over the years. That didn’t seem to bother them? They don’t seem offended when the jury of Belarus gives them 12 points every single year? The rules have not changed since 2009, and since then they placed second TWICE. What are they complaining about?

I’m still mad that Il Volo didn’t win last year, but after 2016 I’m convinced that the juries should NEVER be removed again. Thanks to the new voting announcement system, it was very obvious that juries are way more objective. Televotes are over-biases by neighboring, diaspora, etc. I wouldn’t actually mind going back to a 100% jury voting system. I’m sorry but the general public has no taste (if they had, Taylor Swift wouldn’t be a thing).

Sergey seems like a nice guy, but his act looked more like a circus act than a song. The juries blocked him, and THANK GOD they did.

PavelMay 15, 2016 @ 10:53 pm

It’s the juries! The televote was really diverse.
+++++
What? The televote had two sides amassing 300+ points each which goes to show how nondescript was it

LooMay 15, 2016 @ 10:53 pm

Jamala personally deserved the win, but the voting was WAY too political. This is not good for the contest. Ukraine wants to host it in Sevastopol next year, but I don’t think EBU will approve that.

FatimaMay 15, 2016 @ 10:48 pm

It’s a bit rich for Russians to bleat about the juries when we saw with our own eyes (through the video uploaded by the disgraceful Anastasiya Stotskaya) how unprofessionally their own jury behaved.

@James Rodgers:
If we follow your suggestions, there’ll soon be no countries left in the bloody competition!!

As for the voting system, there will always be people who complain about it. Yes, there are anomalies between the juries and public voting (Poland and Malta being the obvious two this year) but overall I think this current system is much better than 100% jury (which deprives the audience with a chance to have their say) or 100% televote (which is too easily manipulated by diaspora-voting)

In my opinion, the Russian song was all style and no substance. Sergey’s vocal was good but the song itself was very dated, very cheesy pop. Also they threw too much into the staging, such so that the impressive elements of it (like the moving platforms) were spoiled by the unnecessary add-ons (the wings). Obviously there were many of the voting public who liked it, but it doesn’t surprise me at all to see the professional juries having a different opinion.

Overall, while Ukraine was not my favourite entry, I think it is definitely a song with more artistic merit and originality than the Russian entry. It’s true that many people dislike Russia’s political ruling class (and the same could be said for countries like Azerbaijan, Belarus or Israel) but I don’t believe Sergey’s third place was all down to politics.

And while I am glad that Russia didn’t win (nothing political, just because of the song) I will say that Sergey Lazerev seems to be a genuinely great guy and a gentleman, and I like how he was very gracious in defeat.

EllieMay 15, 2016 @ 10:32 pm

All of the people saying that Australia will never win? She came second place it’s not like they where last and no one cared for her song? What are you on about?

This year was otherwise rather dull, the top four songs where the only ones I cared for and I am happy about the win but thought it could have gone either way in the top 3.

senalMay 15, 2016 @ 10:24 pm

I keep seeing the same comment: ”the juries are there to balance the televoting”. The jury’s job is not to balance anything but simply to award the best songs no matter the music genre or the country of origin. Don’t you see how contradictory such a comment is? It’s like saying ”we know how people are going to vote and we are going to vote for the oppposite”. If the juries happen to appereciate different things it should be respected as long as it is justified and not deliberate. The russian song was no masterpiece but it was a good, catchy tune with a slick presentation and a good vocalist. The zero points from 21 countries is unreasonable. As if EBU doesn’t need such entries in order to put on a good show. Puh-lease!

Yakov ZolotovMay 15, 2016 @ 10:18 pm

Such a shame to Eurovision. Absolutly political results this year.

Personally… I don’t see any reason for Russia to be a part of Eurovision while jury destroys everything from real culture.

It’s a shame. Shame for Eurovision.

ARCHIFYMay 15, 2016 @ 10:16 pm

Sonic0201, yes I know that’s the con. But it’s not the televote that is neighbour voting. It’s the juries! The televote was really diverse. But they need to make it 25% juries. If anything!

ESCArgyMay 15, 2016 @ 10:14 pm

@Oxana

That must have been hilarious! Sorry mama Russia, but you can’t win every single year!

@Pavel

Australia won with the juries because, as I have already said, Dami’s vocal capabilities are beyond fabulous!

Simon WMay 15, 2016 @ 10:12 pm

I am from the UK and we could actually say the opposite!!

Of course Russia want the jury influence lessened as they can then take advantage of the dispora, neighbour and friendly votes they will receive in the televote. At the end of the day yes they had a song that was pleasing to the masses however throwing everything INCLUDING the kitchen sink at a performance is not going to impress the juries!

Russia, stop throwing your toys out the pram and accept that you didn’t win

John bayerMay 15, 2016 @ 10:12 pm

Good result
As long as Russia lose Am happy
They need learn that outside of Russia people have different views, values and sense of fun

PavelMay 15, 2016 @ 10:07 pm

I actually think that the Eurovision jury has a political point of view.
++++++
They gave Australia a huge advantage, it may well be political but in a different light, to avoid either Russia or Ukraine winning.

CriticcaMay 15, 2016 @ 10:06 pm

Sergey is a big name in Ukraine. Wasn’t he a former coach on The Voice Ukraine? I wish him all the best in the future. Hope to hear more new music & a world tour from him.

OxanaMay 15, 2016 @ 10:05 pm

Österrike,
actually we would love if Russians will sing about desperate Donbass people who now live in poverty and risk to die. or about Odessa. if they can pass EBU censorship, why not?
it will be fun to hear from them about drama they created 🙂

jaMay 15, 2016 @ 10:05 pm

the juries stay for the simple fact of keeping trash such as russian entries from winning.
that’s all.

DannaMay 15, 2016 @ 10:01 pm

I actually think that the Eurovision jury has a political point of view.Jamala’s song was very good but not a winning one,the same thing happened the last year.Again,too,too much politics and I don’t think they’re out of corruption too.I mean that the Eurovision is not objective enough,that’s why I think that the jury must be changed at all and EBU should “employee”honest people in the jury,thing that it’s not possible and after every ESC final someone will be unsatified

James rodgersMay 15, 2016 @ 10:00 pm

Eurovision destroyed by Russia Ukraine Latvia Belarus Moldava
Azerbijan and the rest of countries who just vote for each other anyway
EBU needs kick Russia out then Armenia Belarus and any other country part of the former Soviet Union
U.K. Should leave and also Ireland and keep their dignity

OxanaMay 15, 2016 @ 10:00 pm

ESCArgy,
thank you 🙂 yeah, I saw their headlines and some best “reviews”, we’re laughing hard at it. There’s no way Ukrainians will get upset, we just enjoy the after-party at its full 🙂
btw, have you seen their studio broadcast where they gathered family of Kirkorov, Lazarev, experts, politics and whole pack of other important people and shared stories about Lazarev’s youth, about Kirkorov kids and waited for the results assured they have won. oh my, that was powerful show on its own to see how paint of Russian flags runs down crying Russian girls, how desperate they were. I can’t imagine what should happen to me so I’ll cry at such “tragedy”. 3d place, and it’s just a song contest after all.
it must be they felt slapped in their face with the winner name, not with the fact that they lost in general.

sonic0201May 15, 2016 @ 9:58 pm

@ARCHIFY
Actually it would be interesting to hear the songs for the first time during the live show, but they can’t hide the songs and the faces. They need to be published before the contest, to promote the event.
Also lots of singer would be still recognized, and country voting would start.

GraphMay 15, 2016 @ 9:56 pm

This year, I think the system worked. It was obvious that Russia’s song was engineered to be a winner in 200% Eurovision fashion. Now, I actually liked Russia’s song (dare I say more than Ukraine?). But if it had won, it would have made the contest way too predictable going forward, and there would be less incentive for originality. So, in the end, I am glad that the juries stopped it from happening.

However, the juries went for Australia. “Sound of Silence” sounds like it was made to be a jury song just as much as Russia sounds like a televote song. A lot of people felt like it didn’t have as much general audience appeal as other entries. Furthermore, it is quite possible that some of the jury members are Dami Im fans, and that could have made them favorable to the song to start with. So, to be fair to the voting public, maybe it’s best that Australia didn’t win.

All things said, Ukraine seems like a fair compromise. It was emotionally moving for the general audience, and it was musically original and vocally powerful for the juries.

I’m happy with the outcome.

PavelMay 15, 2016 @ 9:56 pm

Televoting was a real joke anyway.
Remember how “Quedate Conmigo” got #18 position in the televote, and #5 in the juries.
Televoting is the thing that should be minimalized drastically to an indication of spotify spins/itunes downloads during the interval maybe (of a foreign entry) or some other method which may be focused on the actual song not the country it represents.

ChappersMay 15, 2016 @ 9:55 pm

Real crime is that Australia should have won this contest, not Ukraine, not Russia; Australia. If we invite them to take part you have to conceive that they could win and if people really did vote for the best song and best performance Dami Im would have been the winner. Too many people turned around and said, she’s not European so she cannot be allowed to win!! Well, Azerbaijan isn’t European but they have competed and been victorious. Australia should not bother to try because no matter how seriously they take it and have really added to its success, they will never win because the people of Europe will not allow it.

ÖsterrikeMay 15, 2016 @ 9:52 pm

Ukraine, please stop trolling Europe and Russia. We have to stick together #nodegreeofseparation #cometogether.

You would not like Russia to enter next year with a song about the victims of Odessa that were burnt and beaten to death, or about the lives of those who side with Russia on Crimea and are happy with it, or about the painful lives of those living in the Donbass starving and cut off from banks and pensions.

BarkimedesMay 15, 2016 @ 9:50 pm

“Ukraine this year was also quite dated, the song itself is literally based in history and uses the ethnic music of Crimea. So your point is pretty invalid. People just hated the song because it was Russia it would seem.”

I’m sorry, this argument doesn’t make any sense. When people say that the Russian song was outdated they mean the SOUND of the song is outdated, not the subject matter.

If that was the case, then the most “outdated” Eurovision song ever, according to your criteria, would be “Waterloo”- a song that SOUNDED very current when it won.

As far as using Crimean music, Jamala’s song uses musical scales and vocal techniques similar to what is found in a lot of music of the Middle East, the Caucasus, and other places. That doesn’t make it dated when those sounds are incorporated with hip-hop beats and jazz influenced vocal delivery in parts of the song.

A lot of people liked the entries from Armenia and Bulgaria, and those had traditional musical elements as well, but no one with ears and the capability of hearing would call those songs dated. Those songs sound like they were made in 2015 or 2016. Same thing with the classical influence of Austria’s song- the song doesn’t sound outdated because they put a good beat under it.

The only thing current about the Russian song was the projection screen. At least they had that- Poland’s entry was just as cheesy and dated with no modern touches in the song OR performance.

You want to make the jury professional? Here you go- 5 music PROFESSORS from conservatories across each country. Those are the true music professionals.

James kilnMay 15, 2016 @ 9:49 pm

This is a joke
What do Russia expect? Domination of the Eurovision like their foreign policies?
The fact of the matter is the song wasn’t great- “thunder and lightening is very exciting” is it now?
Like a children’s nursery rhyme
At least the jurors worked this out and as for the public vote on Poland???
Europe is full of poles who left Poland / get rid of the televote

ESCArgyMay 15, 2016 @ 9:44 pm

@Oxana

Congratulations to your country on winning the contest for the second time! You truly deserved it! Russians are such crybabies that they don’t even want to accept that Ukraine beat them! I saw in the news today that Russians are furious because Ukraine won. For example, there was a Russian woman who said “It’s unfair, our song was better than Ukraine’s” and she was crying! Can’t they just get over it and go on? My advice is not to listen to those losers. I send you lots of love from Greece, Ukraine we love you 🙂

OxanaMay 15, 2016 @ 9:36 pm

power b.
“Kirkorov’s and Lazarev’s friend Ani Lorak will represent Russia next year in Ukraine”

oh, that’s exciting news 🙂 we won’t allow her to keep bodyguards, she’s Ukrainian by citizenship, why we should protect her in own country? however, lets see how Ukrainians feel about her “assistance to mama Russia”. she basically had to flew Ukraine because Ukrainians felt very bad about her support of mama Russia. and you say she’s going to return with even greater support to mama Russia? well, if she have balls and thick helmet, that could work 🙂

I think the jury should stay, for the simple reason that we want the BEST song to win, not the MOST POPULAR one or the best performance. The jury should just consist of more and more professional people. Russia had a wowing performance, but the song to me felt dated. I didn’t like Ukraine either btw, my winner was Australia.

ESCArgyMay 15, 2016 @ 9:30 pm

Some people have a serious problem, they think that Russia won just because they were 1st in the televote. Saying that they are the true winner is completely unacceptable, since everyone knows that Ukraine won. Have they realised that we live in 2016 and the contest is not full of circus acts anymore? And this happens thanks to the juries. The juries should stay because they elevate the level of the contest and they encourage countries to send quality entries. Imagine if we didn’t have the juries, this plastic garbage would win. No message, no sophistication in the song. “1944” will always be much superior than that. If you don’t like the current voting system, you can leave the contest just like Turkey did. Otherwise, you need to accept and respect reality. Now, Mr Kirkorov and Mr Akutsya can go cry and live in their virtual reality. Ha ha ha, they are so ridiculous! UKRAINE, YOUR ENEMY WON! RUSSIA DIDN’T WIN! HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!

Mei InternationalMay 15, 2016 @ 9:30 pm

Kind of ridiculous we are looking at Russia for advice on a more democratic process. Please someone tell me you see the irony in this too. However he has a point. People pay to vote, their vote should count a lot. 5 people that are “professionals” (really used loosely if you look at the profiles on some of these people) should not have the same voting power as the entire continent.

ARCHIFYMay 15, 2016 @ 9:27 pm

Maybe each broadcaster internally selects a song (secretly) and we hear them on the night. And once the votes are closed we find out what country was each song. So there are no neighbours voting. So the likes of the U.K. Will do well…

OxanaMay 15, 2016 @ 9:22 pm

cheesecake, what’s the value of mr Russia congrats to Ukraine if at the same time their broadcaster aired news and lied that Ukraininas not happy with Jamala’ victory, no one is exciting about it and more likely Ukraine will not host this event because they have no money?
and it’s at the time when Ukrainian officials announced that they started to prepare, that they will use private funding to host event (no need to use country essets for it), and even consulted with international specialists if they can build new arena, or should they improve one of already built. Minister of Culture said they will opt for the show with hired professionals to beat Sweden.
there’s nothing wrong in praising mr Russia for his “kind words”, but keep in mind that it does not represent the view even of their official broadcaster.

MarmeladeMay 15, 2016 @ 9:22 pm

@Pollaski 2: Electric Boogaloo nonsense. We vote for Russia or Poland because we are mentally and culturally closer to the songs they send to Eurovision.

@slawomir I voted for Michal and I am not a Pole. Armenian televoters gave him a high point and there are 0 Poles living in Armenia. As for the televoting results in Armenia and 12 points to Sergey… 12 points say nothing because I am sure that 90 per cent of sms was sent for him. He is a huge star here, like Timberlake in the US. He has a big fan base and people would vote for him, even if he didn’t do anything on the stage. You say neighbor voting, I call it fanbase voting. If neighbore voting existed, Armenia would have voted for Alexey Vorobyov too, but we didn’t because we didn’t know him and the song wasnt good.

As for the jury, I beleive thay have to be chosen by EBU and should consist of at least 10 people. It would be great, if former participants could be jury members like in Russia in 2015, when Dina Garipova and Alsou were referees along with internationally famous opera diva Kazarnovskaya and famous musical producer Igor Matvienko. Some of the broadcasters lead nationalistic policies. For example Lithuanian broadcaster chooses 5 anti russian nationalists every year. They might not like the Russian song but come on, it is not the worst when they continuously award Russia with 24-25 places. Please note that 25 percent of Lithuania’s population are Russians but up to date there was not a Russian in the Lithuanian jury… Democracy…

ESC84May 15, 2016 @ 9:21 pm

@Barkimedes
IL Volo post the split result on their facebook after Grand Final in 2015

BBMay 15, 2016 @ 9:20 pm

EBU must change rules for 2017. It s not fair that 5 people decide 50 % of votes of one country and 50 % decide 10000,100000,1000000 people…..
If EBU want to stay 50 % juries 50 % televote, incrase juries members from 5 to 16 like we had in 80 ties. Jury in 4 group from 16 to 25, from 25 to 35, from 35 to 45 and from 45 plus, in every group 1 woman 1 man. Juries to be in music.
If they stay with 5 members of jury in 1 country, decrease their power to 33% and to televote 67 %.
Some countries are pushed so hard this year in voting of juries Australia ,Ukraine,France,Malta,Belgium,Israel,Lithuania,Georgia,UK,Azerbaijan. That countries don t deserved that points.

NikkMay 15, 2016 @ 9:17 pm

@cheesecake I calculated them and acctualy australia would’ve won instead of ukraine and russia would still be third bulgaria fourth france would’ve acctualy been fifth sixth sweden seventh armenia and so on…

sonic0201May 15, 2016 @ 9:10 pm

And how about banning the betting? As much as we like checking the odds, it can definitely influence the voting and who the favourites are.
Of course it will never happen, too much money involved.

CharlesMay 15, 2016 @ 9:09 pm

Kirkorov Kirkorov Kirkorov … the most desperate guy I have ever seen in Eurovision still suffering from traumatized feelings from his 1995 participation .. not being able to fully accept Sergey’s loss and questioning how come 21 did not give Sergey any votes … well … how can I put this … THEY DON’T HAVE TO. The public humiliation due to the Ukrainian victory both musically and politically is really messing things up for Russia. Next time try not to be over the top and gaining desperate attention and focus on bringing just … music. That would make such a difference. Had Australia won this, Russia would not have been as mad as this (or maybe they would with the classical violin tears against juries voting bla bla bla) but it would have not angered them as much. It’s Ukraine … and they just can’t handle the humiliation. At least through the televoting one can see that the people at home both Russian and Ukrainian see to be okey with one another … can’t say say the same about guys like Kirkorov, the Russian TV station and the government. Eurovision will never ver get rid of politics … it’s starts already with mentioning the countries and respective flags to having to ignore all the crappy political tension in Eastern Europe they bring with them every year to Eurovision.

ZafirMay 15, 2016 @ 9:06 pm

Did Azerbaijan and their singer who can t sing good live, deserved 10 points from Sweden jury. Did UK deserved 12 points from Malta jury………

BarkimedesMay 15, 2016 @ 9:05 pm

I didn’t hear any complaining from the Italian delegation (or Russia for that matter) about the jury voting toward the Italian entry last year. His song was dated, cheesy, and filled with trite English lyrics, and the stage show was overkill. Sergey deserved better, and I think it’s great that Sergey himself is keeping it classy. I don’t think the juries are perfect, but dang, guy, take your 3rd place with class.

PavelMay 15, 2016 @ 9:04 pm

Spain getting 10 points from televoting of 41 countries means that public vote is the one that needs to go away fast
Russia should have been at number 5, that is perfectly where this LED drivel belongs

sonic0201May 15, 2016 @ 9:04 pm

Both the jury and televoting needs to stay for obvious reasons. The jury is definitely not doing their work right in this format, but it’s easier to solve the jury problems than the flaws of the televoting.
Yeah, maybe create an international jury, and a scoring system for them where outlier scores are removed from those members, who gave out biased scores.

AnthonyMay 15, 2016 @ 9:03 pm

I also don’t see anything shocking about disagreement between juries and televoters. They’re there for that exact purpose: to balance one another.

ben005May 15, 2016 @ 9:03 pm

I think we need a jury.

The problem is that some juries are corrupted or have no idea what they are doing. When I look at Croatian jury, I just can’t believe who would chose those people. Also Croatian public voted for Serbia just because there are so many Serbs here. The same is with many countries around Russia, who this year had a good song but no matter is it bad or good they will give points from neighbours.

NNMay 15, 2016 @ 9:02 pm

We all knew that juries would pushed so hard Australia and Ukraine in points to defeat Russia and neutralize points for Russia from televote.
We all knew also that juries from 2009 especially from 2013 pushed so hard almost every years some countries . They liked Sweden,Ukraine,Malta,Azerbaijan,Israel, from 2014 in that group joined The Netherlands,Belgium and from 2015 Australia.
We all knew that juries dont like Poland, ani in some countries some countries is every year in their bottom, see how Estonia scored Serbia , every year Serbia is last 2 place in Estonia both with televote and juries. I think if Serbia took some singer from Estonia and song from estonian composer Serbia wili also be last in Estonia with juries and televote.

Natalia KillsMay 15, 2016 @ 8:57 pm

Serrgey is where he belongs and it’s too higher, in my opinion. The composer is so desperate and sad, go blame yourself.

AnthonyMay 15, 2016 @ 8:54 pm

I think the current system is the best and the most balanced so far. I only wish they’ll double the number of juries next year and they will vote separately. Perhaps a nice thing would be ranking songs by several criteria. After all, it’s impossible to completely eliminate political voting as long as everyone knows who comes from where.

ThomasMay 15, 2016 @ 8:53 pm

ONLY POLISH PEOPLES VOTES FOR POLAND !!!!
JURY NEEDS TO STAY !

cheesecakeMay 15, 2016 @ 8:51 pm

The more I think about it, the more I agree. Of course you can’t expect Russia to score top marks from every single jury, the fact that HALF of the juries ranked Sergey outside of their top 10 is shocking to say the least.
In my opinion, juries should keep on existing, but either to a 25% extent OR by increasing the number of members to at least 10 per country. Especially after these results and the case with the Russian member, I’m more and more doubting the professionalism of the juries…

By the way, shoutout to Sergey and Filip. They handle this very well in my opinion, giving some constructive criticism AND congratulating Ukraine. I hope they don’t withdraw though – it’s not even sure Russia would’ve won with the old system (I hope somebody will calculate the winner with that system soon).

rybakMay 15, 2016 @ 8:41 pm

Voting: 66% televoting (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,10,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20, 21,22,23,24,25,26 points for each songs) and, 33% national juries (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9,11,13 points for best 10 songs) from me. Why? Because people pay to vote, when song recieved less point them best 10th songs theirs points lost. 🙁

It’s was clear that the jurors won’t vote for Russia.Even my country gave 2 points (Armenia) and I was surprised. BUT THIS IS not speaking that Georgia was much better giving them 10pts.This is just about that Armenia won’t Russia win.I don’t know why?And give 12 points to France..I was really happy for France .Our televoters gave Ukraine 10 pts and Russia 12.But jury gave 0 to Ukraine because it’s just about politics.Armenian jurors couldn’t gave 12 pts to Ukraine for some political reasons i mean Mama Russia .
Armenia got 10th place by jury or SERBIA.WTF JUJUDGES AHOULD BE OUT THIS IS international music and the televoters must be decided which song should get the trophy.

Yes jury should stay because they are the professionals. Viewers voted for the bettings they did and this should stop because it became voting to win money not for the best song

WawwuMay 15, 2016 @ 8:23 pm

I’m a big rooter for including jury votes. If we compare the quality of the songs between the last 3 contests with the ‘dark ages’ of Eurovision (2005-2010, what a bunch of crap), the juries have upped it alot.
But 5 members will still have their own reasons to vote for a certain contestant, which arent always based on their opinions of the songs (politics, personal relations with other countries etc.). Thats bad in a music contest, but there is no way to rule this out in a certain way. You can only do that if a jury watches and listens to a song and performance for the very first time, without knowing which country it represents. But because all the songs are known weeks before the event takes place, this solution isnt possible. The only thing you can improve, is if the EBU makes sure the 5 jurymembers of a country watches and votes the juryshows individually. But then again it is still possible for the juries to arrange and decide beforehand who they will rate where, because they already know which song is from which country.

The televoting system has got its flaws as well. If followed it this week in the Netherlands, and there wasn’t a single person in the media who thought that Poland was a possible winner, I’ve never heard a Dutchman say that the Polish song was one of the better, and in the history there wasn’t a very big Polish community to give big points from NL (normally it is Turkey, Armenia or Belgium as a neighbor). Now the Dutch televote gives them 12 points, and NL was not the only country where this happened.

BasterClasterMay 15, 2016 @ 8:21 pm

P. S. The competition which was created to unite Europe! Now separates people… 🙁

@Eugene!
Finally someone has said it! I always said that the best way to produce a non-biased and neutral vote was the inclusion of countries outside Europe, international juries from each of the other continents.
USA/Canada, Brazil/Argentina, South Africa/Nigeria, China/Japan and New Zealand/Australia (before they started participating).
It would increase viewership outside Europe while also delivering fair results. Without actually having any of these countries participate in the actual
Contest itself.

IvanMay 15, 2016 @ 8:16 pm

I hate the Ukrainian song, but I am happy that Russia lost !!! 😀
BULGARIA gived 12 points to RUSSIA, but RUSSIA gived 0 points to us both in Televote and Jury.
We will take that in mind for the next year voting 😉
But cheer up Russia, they can still use your song as a theme for the new Voltron series 😀

taniaMay 15, 2016 @ 8:14 pm

ukraine was rather high in both jury votes and televotes what led to winning.
i don’t feel sorry about russia who got votes from jury also thanks to neighbours (12 points from azerbaidzhan, belarus, from cyprus and greece because in russian eurovision team there were a lot of greeks).
the only sorry i feel is for australia who was winner according to jury but got too few points from televoting as lacked neighbors in europe.

BasterClasterMay 15, 2016 @ 8:12 pm

Read comments on facebook page:https://www.facebook.com/EurovisionSongContest/
It is obvious that a large part of the population of Europe in anger!!!
I was very sad to watch. To see how really the best team in Europe (Russia+Sweden+Greece+France) lost to the jazz singer from a political song.
Also I am very sorry for:
– Germany
– Spain
– Croatia
– Czech Republic
– Iceland
– Belarus
– Norway
– Denmark

In the last 8 years, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013 and 2014 the televote and juries agreed.

In 2011 only the televote agreed with the eventual winner Azerbaijan.
In 2015 only the juries agreed with the eventual winner Sweden.
In 2016 neither agreed with the eventual winner Ukraine.

We cannot do away with the juries, that is for sure because of diaspora and “taste”. But there just seems to be as much neighbourly love or “anti-vote” with the juries as there is with the public these days. It is all a bit of a shambles really. The juries are not supposed to be biased or vote tactically and they are supposed to be “professional”. The 5 members clearly discuss what they are going to do as a group.

Perhaps it is time to introduce a “neutral” International jury made up of say Associate Members? Say European Juries as normal 25%, an International Jury 25% and finish with the televote 60%. This could add an extra layer of “excitement” too.

The public pay to vote and they need to feel their vote is just not being overruled by people who are not acting professionally or responsibly. It’s not by all of course, but enough to make a difference I feel.

The juries were correct. Russias song was not top 10 material. The whole point of the juries was to offset sheep voting, which we saw in droves from the televote as all the eastern bloc countries that secretly still wish they were soviets turned out votes for Mudda Rusha in buckets

Thank god for the juries. If anything needs to be done- expand them to ten or twelve members. Tgis way each persons vote weighs less

LorenzoMay 15, 2016 @ 7:54 pm

The new voting system is a farce and more complex than it needs to be. The jury should be made up of say 25-50 music professionals/ music industry insiders from each country and they each vote on the SONG and PERFORMANCE on the night. After the aggregate votes converted into points.

The fact ABBA and Celine Dion are the only 2 acts who have achieved major success through the competition throughout all of Europe in 61 years shows that the ESC isn’t about music. Maybe they should rename it the ‘Eurovision Political Voting Show’. There were some songs in ESC2016 that were really radio friendly and if pushed could get moderate success. Some songs were quite interesting melodically and instrumentally- yet these were songs that the general public ignored. Televoting makes too much money for it to be dropped so how about making the televote count for 25% of the score? This might make it more fair for countries with fewer diasporas across Europe having a chance. Presently it’s always the same countries doing well whether they enter a good song or not.

The fact comments below show how subjective people are about the countries shows that televoting on the whole is too political/ cultural and that 5 people on a jury also puts the entire vote into dispute.

taniaMay 15, 2016 @ 7:53 pm

the problem is not about percentage of jury votes as about its professionalism. and russian jury is one of the best examples to it if you remember scandal with one of its jury voting for armenia because her husband is from armenia and the same situation with share of their points from jury and televoters to ukraine.
and its not about juries of all the countries. some countries were quite professional.
i don’t know how the situation should be improved but definitely something should be done

AlejadroMay 15, 2016 @ 7:48 pm

Ok just look at televoting, and you will see what differents between Russia and Ukraine was only 38 point. After who gave highest score for Russia. All former USSR republics even Ukraine gave 12. So conclusion is in, what we need jury, for correct voting. If not jury each year the winner will be someone with lot of neighbors. Watch to jury voting, you will see, what Ukraine same received 0 point from many country.

Donut DonutMay 15, 2016 @ 7:45 pm

The juries were created to balance the biased televote…Now the televote is balancing the bias juries vote … So yeah, we dont need these juries anymore

slawomirMay 15, 2016 @ 7:45 pm

@Steven. Do you REALLY think that ONLY Polish diaspora voted for Micha? Szpak? 🙂

DarrenMay 15, 2016 @ 7:43 pm

I am sorry but something has to be said, and this is coming from somebody that is not a sympathiser of any stretch of the word BUT the people saying that the jury was right to mark down Russia because the song was outdated and unoriginal, yes, it was I agree, but then these people say that Ukraine was the right winner, take a look at yourselves!
Ukraine this year was also quite dated, the song itself is literally based in history and uses the ethnic music of Crimea. So your point is pretty invalid. People just hated the song because it was Russia it would seem.
Russia was nowhere in my Top 10 or even Top 15, but the attitudes of some people here is unreal.

DavitMay 15, 2016 @ 7:39 pm

@WellDoneUkraine! 😀 On the other hand Armenian jury always gives 8-12 points to Montenegro regardless the song or everything. It’s a common known fact that Montenegrin broadcaster presented a luxury house in Montenegro to the Musical producer of Channel 1 Armenia. Thus, year after year Armenian jury gives Montenegro 8-12 points.

Bhrister CjorkmanMay 15, 2016 @ 7:32 pm

The system is not flawed itself. The biggest flaw is how poor those individual jurors are. When you rotate five people every year you soon run out of people with actual expertise. Up the qualifications and enable real experts to vote more than one year.

WellDoneUkraine!May 15, 2016 @ 7:30 pm

Ok. I’m going to get hate for this, but I’m making a point.
Jury should stay as it is. We all saw proof on Saturday that juries vote for the songs, not the country. People are saying that juries should be removed as ‘they vote politically’. It’s the other way around. The Montenegrin jury gave 12 to Malta for example. Have they ever even exchanged votes in the final before? I’m not sure, but if they have its low points.
And I’m sorry, but he’s just being a sore loser. Everyone is surprised that Russia did so poor with the juries, but it’s the way things are. I bet if the juries had helped sealed Sergeys win, he wouldn’t be complaining.
If I’m honest though, he makes a fair point about juries going from 50% to 25%; I understand it’s not fair that 5 people have the same impact on the result as millions of viewers. They should stay though, to give Western countries a chance (we all saw the UK got a respectful, deserved position with the juries, but the televotes killed it).
Finally though, I’d like to say that I LOVE the new voting system. It was pretty clear just after half way that Austraia had won the jury vote, but the new voting system kept us guessing until the end!

I know most will disagree with this, but it is just my opinion
Thanks

Ben RafterMay 15, 2016 @ 7:29 pm

I think they should keep this year’s voting but the jury should be made of 30+ music PROFESSIONALS. 5 people who each have 10% of its country’s vote is pathetic.

power b.May 15, 2016 @ 7:25 pm

Kirkorov’s and Lazarev’s friend Ani Lorak will represent Russia next year in Ukraine. or Vera Brezhneva, or any female talent born in Ukraine, but living in Russia. LOL what a slap

The problem isn’t the 50% of the jury, the problem is who the judges are. Even they have to vote according to some rules, they continue voting based in the geopolitics, see the national juries who award Russia 12 points: Belarus, Azerbaijan, Greece and Cyprus. How Kirkorov, a person from Russia that receives point just because (as well as Turkey did), can complain about juries? Belarus and Azerbaijan give 12 points to Russia because they are ex-sovietic republics… and for Greece and Cyprus, if I remember well, the lyricist, composer or whatever of ‘You are the only one’ is Greek. So as I said before the juries aren’t the problem but who the judges are or should be, professional unbiased people. The Russian song was dated, bland, cheesy and crappy with an exagerated use of technology to fix the previous said, and that’s why juries did’t vote for it, no more. They have the adventage of televote as Turkey getting always a top 10, but they want even more adventage, calm down.

I would worry more about the televote and its unfairness. How on earth that song from Poland could receive 222 points?? As well as Azerbaijan, Samra should have got a bottom placement but the televote save her!

Rock MeMay 15, 2016 @ 7:21 pm

Ukraine deserved to win and I am so happy for them.The best song has won.
Russian outdated pop song got more than they deserved & placed 3rd so I don’t see what’s his problem….
If there were no juries Poland would’ve come 3rd (it was pure crap) & many other injustices.
It’s so hard to admit that better song has won.

CryWolfMay 15, 2016 @ 7:19 pm

It makes me laugh how people can be so against the 50/50 system.

Experience has proven time and time again that 100% televoting doesn’t work, the influence of diaspora and neighbourly voting is too big.
Countries will often give more votes to their neighbours.That might be rather irritating for countries who don’t belong to any of the big blocks, but I’m affraid there’s nothing we can do about it really. These blocks have often a very similar taste and they know the artists/language of the surrounding countries so it’s rather normal they will distribute votes more easily in between eachother.
On the other hand, diaspora voting might easily be countered by allowing only ONE televote per person. But that will also mean less income for the organisers, something they won’t like at all.

Then there’s the juries. Unfortunately some eastern european countries make a joke out of it. Before they start criticising the system it might be time for those countries to start taking things a bit more serious and leave politics out of it. Especially in western Europejuries have proven quite adequate the last years for balancing out the influence of diaspora and neighbourly voting. But now they split up both votes and the influence is becoming bigger again.

The voting is still not ideal but at the moment the 50/50 option with juries is still the better solution, whether some people like it or not.

AlexanderizedMay 15, 2016 @ 7:19 pm

@Davit
I really liked your comment! Hopefully, ESC will only bring all those good changes to Ukraine, to its gay community and freedom of press. I’m slightly afraid, though that there still will be a lot of tension between Russia and Ukraine (Russians males are not allowed into Ukraine at the moment).

KarenMay 15, 2016 @ 7:17 pm

In my opinion this is a statement that’s going to snowball into Russia saying they are not going to compete next year. If Russia do go off and do their version of Turkeyvision, let’s hope they take some of their ex-Warsaw Pact countries with them and then we can see a better match of jury and public votes.

StanMay 15, 2016 @ 7:16 pm

Wasn’t the Russian jury the biggest Joke of all!?

I’m against televoting. It’s just not fair! People break rule number 1 and vote for their own countries.

Of course jury can stay. But Guys! MY dear friends! How can a broadcaster of a democratic state select 5 jury very far from music and very politicized. I mean how does Lithuania manage to select such 5 people two years on a raw who award Russia with the 25th place (in fact all of them except a 22nd place) when the society spends money and awards Russia 2nd or 3rd place… Is it democracy when 5 people decide the outcome of “the NATIONAL voting”. Jamala’s song is an outstanding one. But if there were no politics, it wouldn’t be a top-5 song. Anyway I am extremely glad for the victory of Ukraine. Last year their doors will be open for mass media (a lot of channels and journalists are persona non grata in Ukraine) and hopefully their freedom of press and speech will improve. Currently they are on the 150th-160th position in the global ranking – worse than Irak, Syria, Lybia and Afghanistan. I also hope that the contest wll do good for the LGBT community in Ukraine. Ukraine is the least gay-friendly country in Europe. On Saturday about fifty LGBT people were beaten on the streets of Kiev.

MarcoMay 15, 2016 @ 7:05 pm

I think the juries should stay, but maybe in a different composition (more people?) and again really combined results. That way, the televote’s 11 or so places dont get lost but can influence more.
100% televote would be a bad idea. Just look how overly strong diaspora-countries like Poland, Lithuania or some Balkan countries depended on these votes only… But then again, there is no perfect solution, and under every voting system somebkdy will have reasons to complain and feel disadvantaged.

PaulMay 15, 2016 @ 7:04 pm

Maybe they should make each OGAE the jury…

AlexanderizedMay 15, 2016 @ 7:02 pm

@latjee

I agree with everything you’ve suggested!

sonic0201May 15, 2016 @ 7:02 pm

The biggest problem with the jury is that they are also voting for personal reasons, personal taste, and friend countries. How come one song is very last at a jury member, and 1st at another jury member in another country? How can this logically happen, when they supposed to follow the same guideline?… I guess this is why we have 42 jury groups, so their combined points might reflect the right order, but sometimes their scoring looks as random as the televoting.

HollyMay 15, 2016 @ 7:01 pm

@Alexandrized
I understand and respect your opinion. However, I still don’t think that juries should be reduced percentage in any way, under any circumstance. I will speak in my opinion; Ukraine deserved to win. It was a great, very original song and I do believe that the more original the song is, the better chance it has of winning, especially in eurovision. This is how a song stands out. Not to mention, on the other hand, while Russia did very well with the televotes, there are countries out there, deserving of a very good place, and they would not get halfway there without the jury votes. So, yes i do feel that as there are countries which get closer by televotes, there are as many other countries who get closer by jury votes. This concludes me to say, that at Eurovision we need both votes equally.

an esc fanMay 15, 2016 @ 6:52 pm

The televote shoud not give points to the ”best song” (whatever that means)
but if a song wins televote it means that song has a future, somebody will
buy it. Otherwise we will have a winner that will be forgot the next day.
Jury must go away !

latjeeMay 15, 2016 @ 6:52 pm

If we want ESC to be a contest just about the songs, a few things have to change:

1. Ban the use of holograms or other extensive uses of technology, just have a colorful background and perform your SONG. (Sofi Marinova-style)
2. The jury should have less power and way more people should be in it(!).
3. We shouldn’t be voting for a country, but for an artist and its song, now at the beginning you see in giant letters the name of the country and in a small font the artist, but it should be the other way around, so you don’t immediately know the country, in the score board the artist should be listed, not the country. This is to prevent too much diaspora and political votes.

AlexanderizedMay 15, 2016 @ 6:51 pm

@Holly
Giving the power to a handful of people who can easily be influenced or corrupted (and that’s the current situation) is far more dangerous, I think. Last year Polina Gagarina delivered a stunning performance getting 8 point from Lithuanian people. However¬—for whatever reason¬—Lithuanian jury put Russia last, and in the end Gagarina got how many point? Zero.

Yes, “ordinary people” can be biased while voting, but if the so-called bloc voting really mattered that much, Russia would win every year. But before 2009—when they introduced the jury¬—Russia only won once. Before 2009, there were political voting as well, but at least the winner was always obvious and he or she won with a big point gap. Not like this or last year.

sonic0201May 15, 2016 @ 6:47 pm

It’s so funny that Mans didn’t win the televoting last year, and Sergey did this year. Mans was better than Sergey in every aspect.

karminowe.ustaMay 15, 2016 @ 6:46 pm

Jury is unjustified. In my opinion 100% televoting is the best solution. People vote for songs which are emotionally and catchy. Jury vote for neighbour`s songs. Malta is phenomen, jury voted for Ira although she isn`t great vocalist. Ira`s song is average. Sergey is my personal winner. I voted for him from Poland.

RuudMay 15, 2016 @ 6:46 pm

“We lose because we have a bad song, but we’re gonna blame it on the juries”

This is just Russia being sore losers. Given how dated and cheesy the song was, it would have been very surprising if at least some jurors hadn’t marked it down.

Jamala won because she was able to appeal to both the public AND juries, and that’s the RIGHT reason to win. Sorry Russia, next time try sending an act that isn’t likely to be a jury turn-off.

CraigMay 15, 2016 @ 6:42 pm

@WilliamLeeAdams – interestingly enough no one has yet noticed that the real loser of jury voting is Poland. The difference is huge! 7 points from the jury and 222 from the televote? I can’t believe all 222 points came from the Polish diaspora vote, especially taking into account the fact that 12 points came from Belgium and Austria. The same happened when the juries marked down Donatan & Cleo and Monika Kuszynska. Are the juries total boobs again?:)

LauraMay 15, 2016 @ 6:37 pm

If jury voting is still there next year, I won’t watch it again. No point. People work hard to perform there and why?? To be put down by some jury because of their nationality??

That is truly the last thing that should happen at the song contest.

sonic0201May 15, 2016 @ 6:36 pm

There are lots of problems around the jury, but to be honest, Russia was rightfully marked down on jury level. Sergey did the best he could do, and visually it was brilliant. But the song was not the best in the contest, and the staging resembled too much to the previous winner.

HollyMay 15, 2016 @ 6:35 pm

@Alexanderized

Yes, i understand that, that situation can be very complicated, however leaving the maximum vote for the televote does not guarantee that the best song will win. and as the example you’ve mentioned about a couple of juries being unfair about certain countries, just think of the fact at how many televoters can vote unfair just because of the country? I simply find it very fair that the juries get as much say as the people, that’s all.

Le cookieMay 15, 2016 @ 6:35 pm

Well maybe send a better song next year? I am so happy their crappy song didn’t win ( I wanted Australia to win tho.. )

After the final, in a belgian talk show a belgian jury member said they didn’t give Russia a lot of points because the SONG ISN’T GOOD… They gave Australia a lot of points because her voice is among one of the best EVER in Eurovision and the song is very modern and radio friendly.

EghMay 15, 2016 @ 6:34 pm

I should say that he got 12,10,8 points in many countries because of the big Russian population in those countries.

AndrewMay 15, 2016 @ 6:34 pm

Russians calling for a rule : “Russia must always get jury points”. Pathetic.

mocosuburbianMay 15, 2016 @ 6:32 pm

wow it’s almost as if nobody is required to love russia’s song 😮

BBMay 15, 2016 @ 6:31 pm

The juries made a right decision with giving Russia not that much points. The song isnt modern and has not the highest quality. The show was brilliant yes, i cant deny but its still a SONG Contest. And the song was not the best…

TransmermaidMay 15, 2016 @ 6:30 pm

UKRAINE AND JAMALA DESERVED THE WIN
up yours russia get the hell OUT of Eurovision!

PaulineMay 15, 2016 @ 6:29 pm

I am for putting the jury voting away. Not only because I really did like russian performance.

I think that only the audience should decide which song they like. That’s what music is about. What do we know about this jury? Why is this small group able to influence the result as much as millions of people? None of them are politically neutral.

Why wasn’t the ukrainian song forbidden? Everybody knew what it was about. Wasn’t the aim of the contest to unite Europe and just enjoy some new songs and voices? They did the opposite. If the song was from Israel or Russia about Hilter…I think it’s obvious that it wouldn’t be allowed at the contest. There should’t be any double standarts in a peaceful contest.

We all know that people love it to hate Russia, it’s very common. And I think Russia shouldn’t take part in this circus any more if they don’t remove the jury voting. Because otherwise it will happen all over again each following year.

IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABOUT MUSIC AND FAIRNESS. NOT ABOUT WAR, HIDDEN MESSAGES AND POLITICS.

AlexanderizedMay 15, 2016 @ 6:29 pm

@Holly

No, it hasn’t always been like that.

“Why fix what isn’t broken?”
I’ll just repeat myself: every year Armenian jury put Azerbaijan last and so does Azerbaijan to Armenia. Second year in a row, Lithuanian jury put Russia on the last place. This is just 2 little examples. Does it all look right to you?

The problem is that EBU changed the jury marking scheme without telling anyone (again). It is obvious that the Russians (at least) did not know the marking scheme was going to be changed. Funny though that in 2015, the Swedes put in an act with huge effort in the background and in 2016 they put in an act with very little background……How odd is that? Do you think that the Swedes knew???????????

MTDMay 15, 2016 @ 6:26 pm

Be for or against Russia, but Kirkorov has a point.

Last year with Il Volo was an odd situation, but this year everything felt apart. This time, we have a winner that is neither televote or jury winner. I don’t like that fact.

Either way, I hope that Ukraine will put a decent show next year, a show that I would rather skip though and would not like to watch it.

MMsMay 15, 2016 @ 6:24 pm

what reduce the role of juries? come on … you know why he is making this argument? This is because his very original project failed (sarcastic ofc). They did not deserve to win, with that cliche song, every bit of it copied both musically as well as visually. Look at the votes the small countries got. If the juries are not there Malta, Czechia, San Marino, and others should just reject participation to leave the same Nordic and ex Soviet countries to participate alone. As if he doesn’t know that the televoters vote politically … come on!! Russia is in the top 10 every year and he is making complaints?

an esc fanMay 15, 2016 @ 6:23 pm

Jury should ballance the televote, but we see that they only have interest
in sabotaging the public favourite.
I don’t want to hear complains about diaspora and block voting, if this happens it means that the locals are dead or in coma or just not interested in ESC.
At the end of the day, the people are the ones who buy music and create
many views on youtube.
Juries should disappear.

HollyMay 15, 2016 @ 6:21 pm

No matter what anyone declares, eurovision’s voting method has always been 50% jury and 50% televote. It has always worked, why should it be changed now? Why fix what isn’t broken?
Ukraine’s song deserved to win. Russia’s song was great and it shows since it made the top 3. Hell, i wish my country made the top 3!
Anyway, Ukraine’s song was deep, original and completely unique and different than any entry before eurovision 2016. The song stood out than any other and they way Jamala delivered it was absolutely inspiring. This is why it won.

AlexanderizedMay 15, 2016 @ 6:19 pm

@light star

So, in other words: you support biased political voting from the jury? Nice going.

RhyMay 15, 2016 @ 6:17 pm

+Ljupco MACEDONIA Agree!!
Regardless of Russia situation here, juries are very questionable. The proof is the last night when we watched jury results getting presented instead of combined for the first time ever. There were many moments when you asked your self ‘how a professional jury can award this??’ 10 points from Sweden to Azerbaijan (of course, it’s a swedish song), 12 points to Georgia from the United Kingdom and so on.. Only a deaf jury can place Azerbaijan higher than Croatia, Serbia and Czech Republic. 5 people can’t have the same power as millions of people. That 5 people can easily be corrupted and unprofessional. -Russian jury scandal for an example. So, at least let it be 25% juries and 75% televote or something, but one thing is clear – juries must be reformed!

RichMay 15, 2016 @ 6:10 pm

I reckon a positive change would be for the jury members to sit away from each other to watch the jury final, and not watch and comment on it together, seeing as the personal rankings of these individuals have such a major impact on the results as a whole.

Just looking at a small cross section shows that generally the five jurors from each country tend to closely agree with each other a lot of the time, no matter how oddball their overwhelming appreciation for a certain track seems. For example why did all five UK jurors think Georgia was so great? Perhaps they discussed it very favourably with each other while watching it together and influenced each other’s opinions on the track. I wonder if they’d have all come to the same conclusion individually and ranked it 1st or 2nd if they’d been watching alone? (Maybe they would, I’m just thinking aloud as the result was so bizarre).

There are many many other similar examples of this in the results, like nearly all of the Australian jurors believing Belgium was the best – not that it wasn’t a decent song and performance but it’s odd that they’d all be so collectively overwhelmingly appreciative of it when other juries ranked it far lower down. Watching something together with other people obviously can influence or challenge our views on something, it’s only human nature – but doesn’t seem particularly fair in Eurovision terms, particularly when the jury voting accounts for 50% of the total.

SomeoneMay 15, 2016 @ 6:07 pm

After googling… this guy is a mess. He shouldn’t be speaking with that kind of scandalous past… He clearly has no shame

By which standards does Armenian jury put Azerbaijan on the last place and vice versa? By which standards did ALL of the Lithuanian jurors put Russia on the last place? Is that what you call a PROFESSIONAL jury?

OxanaMay 15, 2016 @ 5:59 pm

It sounds like:
a) Russians still have to learn how keep your face when you lose
b) Russians looking for a graceful way to avoid visiting Ukraine next year. No one will change rules for them, then it’s their call to get in their pose and say they are withdrawing
c) Filip must be very desperate if he sat all night and typed shortcodes for all these flags just to show us “the conspiracy” behind voting. too bad he was sleepy and forgot to mention that Russia did same ugly things to other quality songs.

ChrisMay 15, 2016 @ 5:58 pm

its almost like those 21 juries were busy giving their points to countries the deserved the points for the best song. Because lets face it, visually Sergay’s performance was one of the best, if not THE best in the contest’s history and that’s what gave Russia the televotes, because it was pretty staging and fun to watch. But the song was so dated and the lyrics were cheesy and tacky and just not enjoyable to listen to. While Kirkorov and the rest Russia can complain all they want about the jury, for once I feel like the juries made the right choice this year with Australia as their #1 and they worked perfectly under the new system.

DarrenMay 15, 2016 @ 5:57 pm

I think the juries are needed in order to control the bloc voting. I mean c’mon, Poland would have been 3rd if there were no juries. They are needed. But the new system is weird, but it’s new so maybe it will sort itself out. It would seem that the juries were too harsh on Russia.
But, credit where it is due, I commend Sergey for congratulating Jamala, regardless of the voting results. Personality wise he does genuinely seem like a nice guy.

MirkoJoshuaMay 15, 2016 @ 5:57 pm

I think that jury should be replaced like artists voting (secretly) for each other in the green room or something like that. Jury just create mess

SDMay 15, 2016 @ 5:57 pm

if the juries are eliminated certain countries would never even make it out of the semi final just because neighboring countries vote for each other

MarMay 15, 2016 @ 5:56 pm

I think he said it very well, and his point can easily be applied to last year’s situation too. I think the jury should be expanded to 8 or so members, or it’s power should be reduced. There is clearly more political voting going on among the “proffesionals” than the people.
I disagree about pointing out the ukranian jurors, the russians did the same thing and it’s pretty understandable. The russian jury also gave Azerbaijan 10 points and that’s unexcusable.

hasaMay 15, 2016 @ 5:56 pm

5th position sounds about right to me. Just saying.

Joseph PaceMay 15, 2016 @ 5:55 pm

I think the televoting is not credible. Example Malta jury result 4th place and televoting 22 place. People are not voting for the songs but for the countries. Televoting must be another award and the eurovision winner must be of the professional juries

AndrewMay 15, 2016 @ 5:53 pm

Jury`s work to mark entries by some standards, not to guess people preferences. What if all televotes would go to San Marino? Jury must give SM points even though is is bad entry?
Jury marke Russia very high – 3d out of 26. Guided by list of criteria jurys have who can explain why Russia should be higher in jury than Dami Im or Jamala? Russians just so desperate in their loss. Deal with it. If you dont like 50-50, just withdraw, like Turkey or Portugal. It is not the end of the world. You knew rules, and now being not satisfied by them looks sad.

Shirley AzzopardiMay 15, 2016 @ 5:53 pm

People pay to vote, therefore more weighting must be given to the televote. Besides honestly I wish the jury could be more transparent about their voting – they should state what they are basing their vote on – lyrics, vocals, technique, feeling etc…

RimigMay 15, 2016 @ 5:52 pm

I believe Russia deserved a good spot, as it got. But I don’t think that circus act should have won, because there were plenty of songs with better quality (Ukraine, Netherlands, Australia…) I think Polina should have won last year and the Common Linnets in 2014, but the public does not always reward the best songs (they like bearded women and climbing icebergs even if it has nothing to do with the song). On the other side, the juries are supposed to compensate that, but unfortunately they are frequently influenced by politics. There is no perfect system and noone said that the ESC was fair. However I am quite happy with this year’s winner

KeithMay 15, 2016 @ 5:50 pm

The balance of jury and televote is required…. Russia are sore losers.

nikkiMay 15, 2016 @ 5:48 pm

Here are the results of the Eurovision 2016 with the old voting system from 2009 to 2015 and guess what the winner would’ve been Australia and not Ukraine plus some minor changes in the top 5 and top 10:
320 points for Australia
279 points for Ukraine
240 points for Russia
182 points for Bulgaria
166 points for France
156 points for Sweden
141 points for Armenia
102 points for Lithuania
099 points for Belgium
077 points for The Netherlands
075 points for Latvia
070 points for Italy
069 points for Austria
061 points for Serbia
060 points for Hungary
055 points for Azerbaijan
055 points for Georgia
052 points for Cyprus
050 points for Poland
033 points for Spain
027 points for Israel
027 points for United Kingdom
023 points for Croatia
018 points for Malta
008 points for Germany
001 points for Czech Republic

Ljupco MACEDONIAMay 15, 2016 @ 5:47 pm

Juries are no longer credible. Because of them, this is a second year in a row that the public’s favorite not only does not win, but finishes 3rd overall. And it seems as if they are only employed to sabotage the success of Poland. They sabotaged both their entries in 2014 and in 2016. I also cannot consider a juror or a jury musical professionals if they give rank Samra from Azerbaijan who did not hit a single note right both in the semi-final and the final, higher than Croatia and Czech Republic. It is way too obvious that juries are there only to neutralize diaspora voting, and not to evaluate the songs as musical professionals as they claim they are! GET RID OF JURIES! IT’S ENOUGH!

AlekzanderMay 15, 2016 @ 5:45 pm

Filip Kirkorov can be many things( traitor to his native land particularly), but I can’t argue that the juries should have less interest in the contest and the audience’s votes should be more influential.

StevenMay 15, 2016 @ 5:41 pm

If it was 100% televote Poland would be top 5 from new until the end of time regardless of how good or bad their song was. Both jury and televote are needed.

JLMay 15, 2016 @ 5:40 pm

Then again, Russian jury gave 0points to Ukraine, while their public gave 10.

My Eurovision Scoreboard

Get wiwimail

About Us

All images on www.wiwibloggs.com are readly available on the internet and believed to be in public domain. Images posted are believed to be published according to the U.S Copyright Fair Use Act (title 17, U.S. Code.). Copyright ® 2009-2017 wiwibloggs.com. All text herein is property of the web site and may not be copied or reproduced without explicit permission.